Catholic Exchange

Shock Therapy

The parable of the Good Samaritan is, of course, one of the most well known. As with all the parables, however, it is not enough to know the story; we must also know the context. Our Lord gives the parable in response to "a scholar of the law who stood up to test him" (Lk 10:25), who "wished to justify himself" (Lk 10:29). He speaks to a lawyer who has no real interest in the truth, who wants to spar over legal texts for his own purposes. The man's questions are self-serving, not sincere. This explains why our Lord deals so abruptly with him. We do not sense in our Lord any of the gentleness and patience shown to others. Ultimately our Lord addresses to this man — and to everyone who wants to test God and justify himself — the parable of the Good Samaritan, a parable intended not to console and comfort but to shock and challenge.

The parable answers the lawyer's question "Who is my neighbor?" — a cynical question meant to validate his narrow interpretation of the commandment to love one's neighbor. Knowing this, our Lord seeks to call him out of himself, to deliver him from his selfishness. So he chooses a figure guaranteed to shock: a good Samaritan. Recall that the Israelites and the Samaritans, while geographically more than neighbors, were far less than neighborly. Their mutual enmity had simmered for centuries. To the lawyer, the Samaritans were worse than foreigners. By the choice of such a protagonist our Lord intentionally scandalizes the lawyer. He shocks this complacent and self-serving man into a genuine understanding of love for neighbor.

The parable itself contains several different lessons.

First, it presents the Samaritan as a neighbor — to show that we ought not set limits to our charity. We can never say of our love "Thus far and no further." It must extend even to our enemies.

Second, the parable presents the Samaritan as the exemplar of love for neighbor, to show that God's grace extends beyond Israel, enabling even Samaritans to love as He commands. Finally, the story heightens the meaning of "neighbor." The lawyer begrudgingly acknowledges that the true neighbor was the "one who treated (the robbers' victim) with mercy" (Lk 10:37). To be a neighbor, then, means not to measure stingily another person's degree of relation but to treat that person with mercy. The lawyer (and we) should worry less about who his neighbor is and more about being a neighbor to all.

 Thus the parable provides an inspiring standard of love for neighbor. And the saints continue to teach the lesson. St. Patrick returns to Ireland to evangelize the people who enslaved him. St. Francis tries to convert the Sultan at war with Christendom. And St. Maria Goretti prays for her murderer while dying.

But the parable also carries a great deal of shock value. Two thousand years distant, we tend to miss how scandalous the use of a Samaritan example must have been. And in this regard we can discern still another, more basic, lesson. The lawyer's mistake haunts us as well: we come to the Lord to test Him and to justify ourselves. We seek His endorsement of what we have already decided, rather than first asking what He wants. Instead of conforming our lives to Him, we first establish our lives and then try to fit Him in. And if we have to chisel away some of our Lord's more demanding features so that He can fit into our small, confined lives, then so be it. Thus our Lord's shocking response to the complacent lawyer should also draw us away from any self-serving devotion.

The parable of the Good Samaritan teaches that our love must be generous, sacrificial, extending even to our enemies. But on a more basic level its shocking character teaches us to set aside our own notions of who and how to love, and allow the Lord Himself to instruct us.

Comments

  1. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Thank you for this brief comentary. Especially for describing the parable in a way other than the usual platitudinous manner. You emphasize the shock value of regarding a Samaritan as "good" while his very goodness stands as a correcting and indicting foil to the revered religious establishment of Israel. Paradox. Yes! And a judging paradox at that, which calls for a metanoia while at the same time recognizing the arrival of the Kingdom of God in the person of Jesus. The parable indicts Isreal's reluctance to extend Torah to the world which had been her reason for election from the start but had become contaminated throughout her history by various expressions and practices of exclusion. This reluctance and exclusion had resulted in invidious distinctions in Isreal's heart between herself and the non- Jewish world, thus who would ever envisage a Samaritan as good or as neighbor! This attitude of the heart continued depite all the prophetic literature admonishing against such "exclusive elction" as oppossed to God's will of "inclusive election." Jesus shocks in this parable not only by portarying the Samaritan as good but also by "calling Isreal out" into true ecclessia beyond her individualness to a daunting universality, and doing so in the person of Jesus Himself.  Pope Benedict's interpretation in his book Jesus of Nazareth includes the further point that in so doing Jesus proves Himself Messiah. Praise God! Thank you, Father.

  2. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    This parable does not indict Israel's reluctance to extend Torah to the world (nor anything else), and Isreal was not chosen to extend Torah to the world.  Nor was Israel "contaminated by various expressions of exclusion".  Our Father went to great lengths to tell Israel that they were a "people apart", to command circumcision as a means of standing apart, and all of the promises He made to Israel were for Israel alone – not to anyone else.  Whatever you mean by "inclusive election" was not among the commands Our Father gave Israel. In order to make clear this command that Israel must stand apart, when Our Father brought Israel to the promised land he commanded the Jews not to live amongst them, but to kill all of the people living in that land if that became necessary. All of the non-Jewisn nations had numerous Gods, including the peoples living in the land God had promised to Israel. The primary reason Israel was elected was to tell the world that there was just one God – their God – and the last thing Our Father wanted was to have Israel mixing with any other nation, culture, peoples – "inclusive election".  He wanted them set apart, to remain uncontaminated in any way so they could give the world Messiah.    

  3. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    You badly need to read Pope Benedict's interpretation of this parable and his view of Torah. You are in error here, friend.

  4. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Saul of Tarsus, a Pharasee, knew the law and Torah. He wanted to keep the Jews clean from all this Christianity that was taking hold. He had to be knocked off his horse to get it right, didn't he?

    Goral

  5. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    dannycome lately and goral : If you read Pope Benedict's book Jesus of Nazareth  – which I urge all Catholics to do – especially " The Torah of the Messiah" pages 99ff. perhaps you will begin to understand – at least I would hope so! – that the decisive turn in salavtion history concerned fulfillment not negation of Torah in the person Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus eminently fulfilled the Torah of Moses in His person. This fulfillment reaches back to and accomplishes the promises made to Abraham as recorded in Genesis, especially that of universal salvation through Israel and the fulfillment of the Mosaic Torah. That is the meaning of Israel's vocation as  "light unto the nations" through whom the Torah of the Messiah would bring final, definitive salvation for all in His Person. Now as to your post, what ever do you mean by it!!

  6. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I'm in agreement with you Iwall that's why I commented by mentioning St. Paul's conversion. His commission: go preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, nevermind the Jews.

    Goral

  7. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Here is an interesting take on the story of the Good Samaritan. It was an interpretation by Origen from many centuries ago.

    http://romancatholicinfo.com/catholic-faith/who-is-my-neighbor/

  8. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    danny,

    If I recall my CSS Bible study from a few years ago, God originally wanted His people to be a beacon to all nations and to be a nation of priests, with each and every head of household a priest and each and every house God's dwelling place.  Only after the Golden Calf incident did God tell Moses to keep His people separate, making Israel a people apart until, in the fullness of time, we were ready for Jesus.  

  9. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Goral : O.K. Fair enough. Glad u agree. I just could not put into the context of the parable your statement that Paul " wanted to keep the Jews clean from all this Chrsitianity." Clarify if you please.

  10. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Iwall:  You betray a lack of understanding of Israel's role in Our Father's plan of redemption.  Our Father chose Abraham as a race of people, not yet a nation, belief system or a religion.  Through Jacob He gave them a nation.  Through Moses He gave this race of people a belief system (Torah). Through the subsequent prophets he gave this race a religious practise built around a system of Feast Days (which, incidentally, all point to the coming of Messiah). All during those periods of time He insisted that this race – the Jews – keep apart from the Gentile nations. The Jews were exclusive and made no effort to share Torah with the Gentiles all during this time period because Our Father told them to live apart from the Gentiles.  It was not time to share Torah. It is simply incorrect to say that the reason for the existence of Isreal during this period was to share Torah with the Gentiles, that Israel contaminated herself by keeping apart from the Gentiles, or was indicted by God for doing so. I don't know where you get that from – do I detect a little hostility in there? "Indicted"? Pretty strong word. 

    You claim that "all of the prophetic literature admonished Israel against this "exclusive election" being against God's will".  Amongst "all" of that literature, could you cite maybe three of four prophecies for me?

    With the advent of Messiah came first the command to the Jews to share this good news with all of the Jews (before Christ's death and resurrection), followed by the command to the Jews to share the good news with the Gentiles (after Christ's death and resurrection).   It was then time to share both Torah and the new Body of Christ with the nations – sharing Torah without Christ would have hardly been God's plan for the Jews.

    During at least the first 60 to 80 years after the birth of Messiah, the church was almost entirely Jews. Both the Jews that accepted Christ as Messaih, and the Jews that did not, worrshiped together in the Temple until it was destroyed in 66AD.    After the destruction of the Temple many of the Jews continued to worshipped together in private homes for at least another ten to twenty years. 

    If you would consider those Jews to be Israel (why not?) those are the Jews that took Torah and Christ as Messiah to the world – but only when that time had come in Our Fathers plan.  Had they not, it is very unlikely that the Catholic Church would exist.  

  11. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    danny: I have no lack of understanding of Isreal's role but certainly you do. Have you not read the Prophetic literature! Nothing could be clerarer than that corpus of scripture basically excoriates Israel for her sin, unbelief,and  exclusivity. Where have you been. You are preaching pablum from some video tape you've look at seems to me.  It's as if  you do not even hear my previous post! The exclusivity "allowed" was pro-temp only, my friend, and meant to be transcended and fulffilled as univeraslity through Istael in Christ! His Torah! Did you even read the chapter by Pope Benedict I asked you? No, I am sure. Besides, what ever are you railing on about anyway? Get your concepts right first : Torah is not equivalent to The Torah as a book containing the first five books of O.T as u seem to assume! It refers to God's law and reign and it is eminently fulfilled in Christ. Why don't you go read someyhing! Jeepers!

  12. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    IWall:  You said in your post of 7/14 that the continued practise of exclusion "resulted in invidious distinctions in Israel's heart dispite all of the prophetic literature admonsihing Israel against such 'exclusive election' as being opposed to God's will of 'inclusive election".

    You have dodged my post of 7/17 in which I asked you to cite three or four such prophecies from among the "all".

    I challenge you now.  Not three or four, just cite one or two.  I will settle for one such prophecy from the inspired words of scripture. Please don't respond with quotes from some obscure Pope or mystic that no one has ever heard of. If it is prophecy it is from the Holy Spirit. 

    You made the statement. I challenge you. Cite one or admit that none exist.      

  13. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    danny: What obscure Pope are you possibly referring to!! Pope Benedict is our current Pope! Are you well read, my man? You are "come lately", yeah, very lately I fear. Now,the entire Book of Jonah concerns God's judgment against an exclusivie Israel nationalism aimed at Assyria. Who would ever think of extending salvation to Nineveh! Although the book was written about past a past historical situation and probable fictitious events, it was composed much later, around post-exilic times. It was written to serve the purpose of newly admonishing postexilic Israel against that same stubborn exclusivity. Why don't you try reading Jonah and some good commentary for starters.  I am quite surprised u apparently have no familiarity either Pope Benedict or with Jonah that you "challenge " me to site texts for you. Oh well. Yet another ignorant Catholic. What else is new? To go on… (but I really can't waste much more of my time instructing u in the basics ) : I will stick  to Isaiah only (1) The "Oracles Against the Nations" Is.13; this speaks for itself ( res ipsa liquitor ) it presupposes invidious distinctions! ; (2) Is 5,6 in which the prophet re-sounds the call for universal salvation through Israel, a call directed against Israel' persistent sense of exclusivity; (3) prophetic call and vision to renounce exclusivity and grasp God's plan of justice and salvation  to befall all nations, Is.61,11; (4)  "Reading Guide"  Book of Isaiah in  The Catholic Study Bible, NAB, Oxford 1990 : " Within each major section of the book ( of Isaiah) we see that the prophets and editors were consistently attempting to recognize ever more clearly the inclusion of non-Jews or Gentiles within God's plan of salvation for Israel." p.299. This universal inclusivity had to be gut wrenchingly preached to Israel over and over again. Only univerality and inclusivity  fulfill God's promise made to Abraham. And only in Christ is this universality fulfilled. Pope Benedict says the univeraslity won by Christ is proof that Christ is Messiah. Why? Because His univerality alone is what finally fulfilled Israel's raison d'etre and God's ultimate plan.  

  14. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Oh..by the way, Danny…the Samaritan of the parable is paradigmatic of "invidious distinction."

  15. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Iwall:  Just as I thought.  There is nothing in either Isiah or Jonah that could be construed to even remotely support your contention.  But, please, don't stop writing.  I really enjoy reading your stuff.  You have an excellent vocabularly and you use it with considerable skill to connect meaningless phrases to reach ridiculous conclusions, but you do it so well. Your flowerly writing style was prevalent around the middle of the 19th century when writers used their grandiloquent, turgid, pompus, sonorous, magniloquent, pretentous language to make clear their superior intellect.  But I must compliment you.  You could hold your own  with the best of them – even with William Jennings Bryan himself. Ah for the good old days.

  16. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Danny: Tell u what…read a good commentary on Johna and Isaiah, learn the Pope's name, and read his most recent book. At least that will count as a beginning for what promises to be a long and very bumpy road for you. As for  my entertaining writing style, you don't really know who you are dealing with here so it's a little unfair – I lecture and write on this stuff! As for you and your ignorance and intentional argumentativeness, keep it to yourself please. Good luck. You need it.

  17. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Danny and Wallace,

    Hey, guys.  Your love of neighbor is getting harder and harder to find in either side of your discussion for me.

    PTR!

    "If angels could be jealous of men, they would be so for one reason: Holy Communion." ~ St. Maximilian Kolbe

  18. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Iwall:  PTR is right.  But I am only trying to help your career as a writer/lecturer, and you might want to show a little appreciation for my efforts.  Since you have already found me out as a "dumb Catholic", I will admit that no one has ever asked me to write anything, and even my own family will not sit through one of my lectures.  However, having read your endless responses to Greg Shea on his series about atheism, and thereby having proved the you are much smarter than Greg, I assumed that you were trying to convince CE that you should be a contributing author as well. I can help. If CE doesn't recognize exceptional talent, I know others that will.   

    Our local Luthern Church is seeking a guest speaker for their "Reaching out to non-Lutherns Program".  I showed them some of your stuff and they are interested.  If there is anything Lutherns enjoy it is hearing about indicting contaminated Jews for the invidious distinctions in their hearts that oppose the will of God, and dumb Catholics.  Good stuff, right out of your e-mails. 

    They asked what Church you belonged to and I told them it was the Morpheme Church of God – which is think is accurate.  Don't worry about their discovering you are a Catholic of sorts.  From the stuff you write they will never guess. 

    They did have one request.  Along the lines of invidious Jews and dumb Catholics, could you whip up something about envious Methodists, malicious Baptists, spiteful Evangelicals and malovent Mormons?

    They want to reach out to everyone, and I think you can help them.

  19. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Calm down! Start reading and keep reading. Again, I suggest Pope Benedicts book, Jesus of Nazareth. Will you read and study it? I hope so. I am glad you have come to Catholicism. However, beware of neophyte enthusiasm. You have much to experience and learn. You ahve only begun. Why not take some college level and/or archdiocese courses. A background in philodsophy would help. Watch being too ossifdied in your oponions right now. Nor all opinions are equal you know.You are not dumb or stupid, just unread and very stubborn.

  20. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Iwall:  My wife, children, grandchildren and great grandchildren all agree with you in that I am very stubborn, but add that is the least of my faults. 

    Their suggested list of my more important faults would take up too much space here.  

    I have a degree from a Catholic University (Marketing), twenty hours of ethics, logic, moral theology, metaphysics, the required reading for Augustine, Thomas Merton, Rerum Novarum, Humane Vitaea, Mystic Corpus Chrisiti, and twelve of the most trying months of my life coping with Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologia I and II – all of which were required back then even for non-Catholics. When I converted to Catholicism some years later I had to relinquish my title as the best educated heathen since Paul got knocked off his camel on the way to Damascus. 

    Before college, in April of 1945, I was with a small group of US soldiers rushed to the just captured German V-2 plant at Nordhausen. We were looking for German rocket technology. It was also the location of a concentration camp called the Dora bunker – complete with ten gas chambers and a crematorium. Dora had been operative just five days before, and you could smell it from ten miles away. Most of the Jews had scattered, but some of the more emaciated were still there. Later I learned that 30,000 Jews were murdered and cremated at Dora.  I had just turned nineteen.

    Words matter.  There is no need to indict Jews for their invidious (evil) hearts, or to say that their election has become contaminated because they oppossed the will of God. I think you are a bit bombastic, you like to impress, but you are not a racist and you don't intend to harm anyone.  Words matter. There are people only too anxious to justify building places like Dora, because they had been taught that Jews were evil (invidious), contaminated sub-humans and had rejected Jesus. If I over-reacted I apologize, but words matter.   

      

       

  21. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Danny: No apology necessary…That's quite a background you have related! I seriously thank you for playing such an important part in that terrible war against God and humanity. My uncle was killed at Pearl Harbor; my Dad injured in WWII…. Reading your post, it occurs to me that perhaps you have mis-taken the concept of invidious distinctions. We should re-visit it . There is no questionhere of indicting Jews. Simply to say that in Our Lord's day as with our contemporary situation, humans have the rather ugly penchant for defining themselves negatively: I am not a Samaritan; I am not a black; I am not a tax collector. Along with that there is the all too human  practice of exclusivity: you are not in my circle!  You get the picture. Jesus has showed us the face of God who wants the human race united in Him. That's all there is to the call to cease drawing distinctions that separate and fragment the human race. His ministry boldly accepted,reconciled, and forgave all the unacceptables. His table felllowship was non discriminating. His teaching in the Good Samaritan is importantly geared at demonsating the sin of exclusion and distinction based on a sense of religious superiority, such that even an "unacceptable" Samaritan and not the religious ones showed the mercy God requires of us. One in Christ, universality, and the defeat of Babel byHis Pentecost disallow us from ever drawing these distinctions. I trust and hope I am clearer than perhaps I was before. Have a good night.   

Leave a Reply